The school shooting in Pearl, MS comes to mind first.
I too read the articles of where someone shoots up a mall, or a school, or a church, and think to myself the same as we all do I'm sure. "Wow, if only one person had been carrying in some form OC or CCW, he could have saved alot of lives"
Does anyone have any articles of where a legally carrying civilian member of the community used that right to protect people from someone that was intending harm?
While I understand that a mass shooting by a psycho is a good reason for me to carry, those that may not be as pro-carry as myself could very easily see the same situation as a reason to ban handguns. So I want to try and find articles where someone with a weapon had 'saved the day' so to speak. Where the situation was bad, but would have obviously been much worse had their not been someone there to act.
After looking around I found this. A pretty good collection of stores where an armed citizen saved lives. Sometimes needing to fire, sometimes not.
Since the lady was possibly the ONLY one carrying, it's a miracle she even got a shot at him. If even 3% of the congregation had been carrying, and the shooter knew it, he would probably never have gone there to start with.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Co...Life_shootings
A shooting at an Arvada missionary training facility (http://ywamdenver.org/), the Youth With A Mission (YWAM) center, killed two people and wounded two others in Arvada, Colorado, United States. The gunman went in to the building early Sunday morning December 9, 2007, and opened fire. Witnesses told police that the gunman was a 24-year-old white male, wearing a dark jacket and skull cap, who had a handgun and left on foot. Twelve hours later, the same gunman was wounded by Ms. Assam after opening fire and killing two at New Life Church in Colorado Springs. The coroner ruled that the gunman shot and killed himself after being wounded by Ms. Assam.
It is impossible to prove a negative. We'll never know how many people might be saved with just a few armed people around. But we need to be those people anyway.
But, in the end, I live and therefore I am. I donít need any other personís permission to live or defend myself. I donít need anyoneís vetting of my intentions or sanity, nor approval for the self defense tool I choose or how I carry it.
I donít NEED to explain myself. I donít NEED any reasons at all.
it would also be nearly impossible to prove any situation where open carry might have prevened a crime, because of it's deterrent value. in other words, since a criminal can see you're armed, they never try and commit a crime, thus there would be nothing to report.
Shouldn't this be in the "True Tales of Self Defense" area?
Law enforcement officers are armed civilians who risk their lives to protect other citizens every day around our country. I do assume you mean people other than LEOs but I just wanted to remind people that there are other ordinary people amongst us who are employed, armed and trained to help out if they are available, willing and able. Still though, its up to us to do our part as well for ourselves if we choose to.Does anyone have any articles of where a legally carrying civilian member of the community used that right to protect people from someone that was intending harm?
If that's the case and we as a society choose to ban handguns to make us all feel safer, those same people arguing that must surely feel no need for armed officers anymore as well, right? If we ban guns, than why do we need police with guns? If we are going to say that the police still need guns because law breakers will still carry guns, then we are conceeding that society is still an armed and potentially dangerous place despite our laws and that the law abiding citizen should be afforded the same means of protection as well.While I understand that a mass shooting by a psycho is a good reason for me to carry, those that may not be as pro-carry as myself could very easily see the same situation as a reason to ban handguns.